Walt Shoddy, the owner of Shoddy Shoe Repair, was contemplating retirement. He therefore contracted to sell the business to Pauline Parker. Shoddy Shoe Repair was located in Hoosierburg, Indiana, which has a population of 5,233. Besides containing a provision entitling Parker to use the Shoddy Shoe Repair name for the business, the parties' contract included a clause that prohibited Shoddy from opening up a competing shoe repair shop in Hoosierburg for a period of one year from the date of the parties' contract. Two months after the date of the contract (and one and one-half months after the sale of the business to Parker had been completed), Shoddy grew tired of retirement. As shoe repair had been his life's work, he opened up a shoe repair shop in Hoosierburg. Parker has sued him in an effort to obtain an injunction against his operation of the competing business, alleging a violation of the parties' contract. How is the court likely to rule? Explain your reasoning.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com June 4, 2020, 2:36 am ad1c9bdddf
Due to the fact that Mr. shoddy entered into a legally binding contract to sell his business to Pauline Parker, and provisions in the contract entitled Parker not only to use the shoddy shoe repair name for the business, but also a provision prohibiting shoddy from opening a shoe repair shop in Hoosierburg ...